The hypocrisy of the "climate change leaders"

[doctorjj]

I can only assume that's some kind of joke.

Did you read the article?
Do you have any idea who wrote the article?
Do you know it's the same nut-job that declared in 2003 that global warming was over and the earth was entering a cooling phase?

Wow, that would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

That nutjob may have been right.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v501/n7467/full/nature12534.html

 

[doctorjj]

If you have evidence that disproves the consensus of evidence about climate change, you'll be eternally famous. I look forward to reading your evidence.

Define climate change. Do you define it the same as the IPCC?

 

[YukonGlocker]

That list of people who couldn't get into medical school? Ask them to prove me wrong if we are just going to appeal to authority.

They wrote the article outlining an issue. If you want to refute it, that's on you.

 

[doctorjj]

They wrote the article outlining an issue. If you want to refute it, that's on you.

You won't even back up your own claims so I'm not going to spend my time to refute something from an opinion link you posted.

 

[YukonGlocker]

Define climate change. Do you define it the same as the IPCC?

You'll have to operationally define it in your publication. The current definition/s are in the vast literature that you're attempting to disprove, which I'm sure will be critical to your arguments.

 

[doctorjj]

You'll have to operationally define it in your publication. The current definition/s are in the vast literature that you're attempting to disprove, which I'm sure will be critical to your arguments.

Another non answer. If you won't define what you want me to disprove then I'm not even going to start as I know you'll move the goalposts.

 

[Ace_on_the_Turn]

You're such a sweet talker!

Oh, and you haven't provided any facts yet. Are you fresh out of facts? Did you have any to begin with?

All these 'studies' you refer to are based more on assumptions than facts. Oh, for sure, these studies have statistics, etc., but the analysis provided is at best nothing more than agenda. I don't care how much of the alphabet follows someone's name, until I see facts and repeatable demonstrations on a global scale confirming their analysis, "Man Made Global Warming" and/or "Man Made Climate Change" is nothing more than a hoax.

Woody

PS: My IQ is somewhere around 135.

Nothing more than a hoax? Brilliant. Ignore 99% of the proof as an "agenda". Now that all that proof is ignored, declare it's a hoax. Okay, what ever works for you.

Room temp is somewhere around 135.

 

[YukonGlocker]

You won't even back up your own claims so I'm not going to spend my time to refute something from an opinion link you posted.

I've backed up my claims about climate change, skepticism, consensus, and etc. in this thread. If you disagree with that evidence, feel free to post rebuttals.

 

[doctorjj]

I've backed up my claims about climate change, skepticism, consensus, and etc. in this thread. If you disagree with that evidence, feel free to post rebuttals.

With opinion pieces. Thanks for the laugh.

 

[Ace_on_the_Turn]

I've backed up my claims about climate change, skepticism, consensus, and etc. in this thread. If you disagree with that evidence, feel free to post rebuttals.

Watch out, these deniers have yuge IQ's! He'll whip his out on you if you ain't careful.